And one funny addendum to that story is that someone COULD reasonably think that Pepsi had an actual Harrier to give away. After all, Pepsi once owned an actual navy.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PepsiCo
In 1989, amidst declining vodka sales, PepsiCo bartered for 2 new Soviet oil tankers, 17 decommissioned submarines (for $150,000 each), a frigate, a cruiser and a destroyer, which they could in turn sell for non-Soviet currency. The oil tankers were leased out through a Norwegian company, while the other ships were immediately sold for scrap.
The Harrier commercial aired in 1996. The Harrier jet was introduced in 1978. It wasn’t too unreasonable to think that an 18 year old jet aircraft would be decommissioned and sold, especially after Soviet tensions eased. And if ‘they’ let Pepsi own actual submarines and a destroyer, doesn’t that seem more far fetched than owning a single old jet aircraft?
Guy should’ve gotten his Harrier.
lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
What a cucked judgement. I would have ruled for the plaintiff, with prejudice
Krudler@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Tell me you know nothing about contract law without telling me you know nothing about contract law.
lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
It was a joke, mate. A simple jest. A jape, if you will